Is there anyone on HHO who disagrees with foxhunting?

[Honey08]

I hate hunting.

I've grown up on a farm (with well fenced in hens - haven't lost any yet..) and have worked with horses - including hunting yards in the Midlands, so I've been out with the big hunts. I'd like to think that I'd seen both sides before I formed my opinion.

The best days hunting by far that I've had have been with good drag hunts, like the NE Cheshire. I don't see the attraction of watching an animal get killed to make it better - always think people are a bit wierd who do.

I've not seen many foxes get away after being shot - round us they're usually found. Far more foxes will escape from hounds after being chased for hours by the hunt. Foxes do not have the fittening that the horses and hounds have to prepare them for the hunt, so quite likely they die a slow death or have complications as a result - so I don't buy the "its a better quicker death" line. Hunts catch very few foxes anyway. Its sport and nothing else.

I've also seen too many knackered lame hunters chucked in the auctions, and had to learn a lot of hunting yard tricks when doing my AI - stockholm tarring the legs and throwing clipped horses out in early April to "rough them off quickly" and save the owners money.. In general I got very turned off by the whole scene.

 

[Enfys]

At the point at which the hounds rip a body apart the fox is already dead. It is just that this is very effective and emotive way of suggesting and implying the fox lives through this and it is what kills the fox.

^^^^ Thankyou for stating this fact. I was wondering when someone would.

The fox will generally be despatched by the first hound to get to it. To those that think otherwise have you ever watched your pet dog shake a toy violently before trying to rip it up?

It is merely doing what comes naturally to a predator and 'killing it' that's what happens to the fox.

I have absolutely no problems whatsoever with people being for, against or on the fence on this, or any other subject, I just prefer that the straight facts were known.

 

[touchstone]

At the point at which the hounds rip a body apart the fox is already dead.

Not always, there are some pretty horrific videos on youtube and elsewhere, it isn't always a clean quick death sadly.

 

[Enfys]

Not always, there are some pretty horrific videos on youtube and elsewhere, it isn't always a clean quick death sadly.

No, not always as you say, nothing is set in stone.

I think though, that if we look long and hard enough on the internet (You Tube in particular) we can always find something to support our views/arguments, whether that is the norm or not.

PETA and SHARK are experts at posting clips showing exactly what they want them to, cannily missing out events or situations leading up to that moment. Take the famous Potters clip of a grey pony being shot, you saw the rifle being put to his head and bang! What you didn't see in their propaganda clip was the man calmly leading the pony through and reassuring it first...they cut that bit out as it didn't suit their purposes.

 

[ChesnutsRoasting]

A really good site for those wishing to learn about fox behaviour. In particular the answer to the question "Why do foxes kill for pleasure?" and "Will foxes eat my rabbit/guinea pig?". http://www.thefoxwebsite.org/faq/urbanfoxproblems.html#q8

 

[fburton]

Does that same logic then not apply to the pack of hounds who's own natural instinct is to hunt as a pack?

At which point you then disagree with people accompanying the hunt and not the actually hunting by the hounds?

Yes, hounds are just following there instincts too, with some guidance from us. The difference is that foxes have no choice in doing what they do whereas we choose/chose whether or not to deploy the hounds in pursuit of the fox. I might disagree with that choice, but having made the choice it wouldn't make sense to disapprove of what the hounds do.

 

[foxy1]

Far more foxes were killed by cars than hunting (when hunting was legal). Not such great pest control after all.

 

[Keimanp]

Are you serious - 'some effect' on the fox and it's anthropomorphising to suggest that being chased by an entire pack of animals - three species of animals - is frightening and unnatural?!

OK - so maybe at the ripping apart part it's dead (or maybe not) but that doesn't mean it's a nice way to die, especially after being chased until caught.

I'm interested too in why you think it's 'better in some instances' than other forms of control - just out of interest, why is it better/in what way?

Yes some effect, I am not saying that the fox will be uneffected by being chased or serverly effected, but I nor anyone else on this forum can catagorically say what effect it has on the fox and to what degree. It is likely that in most instances that the effect on the fox will not be as traumatic as people and the media make out thanks to the effect of adrenaline. Should the fox evade a pack of hounds, which they do quite frequently then they are very likely to see no ill effects from the chase, thanks to the natural evolved ability of being a prey animal.

It is a better form of control in terms that the chase of the fox utilises the natural instincts of the fox, 'to flee'. In reality 'The chase' does not last all that long and when the first hound reaches the fox death is fairly quick. So from the initial chase to the kill you are looking at 15 minutes. (The whole duration of the hunt is probably 6 hours. A fox is not kept in a box and released just before the hounds and the whole 6 hours are spent chasing it. The majority of the time is spent on the hunt for the quarry)

Alternatives being Poison or gun. No poison you put down will kill a fox in less than an hour, death is longer, slower and more drawn out probably closer to the 24-48 hour mark. I would imagine poisoning has the same effect as being ill slowly deteriorating.

Most farmers who are the most likely person to shoot a fox are not trained marksmen, they use shot guns, and if you watch on a shoot you typically get a wall of 10 people with shot guns aiming at 1 bird. Everyone doesn't hit the bird and on occasion it gets away. The chances are that the fox will get maimed and will slope off into the undergrowth or its den and either slowly bleed to death or deteriorate due to healing but then not being able to hunt due to injuries sustained. Could be instant, likely to be longer, 15 mins to up to a week or so.

The best and cleanest method would be to employ trained marksmen but this is neither practical or affordable. So out of the realistic options it is a better option.

 

[fburton]

ahhh so it's ok for a fox to chase a rabbit and a car to knock over a fox and leave it in agony by the side of the road to endure a slow and painful death but you don't like the thought of hounds chasing a fox and it being killed quickly by the huntsman don't think you've really thought that through

Cost-benefit analysis... Killing foxes accidentally on the roads is unavoidable - unless we ban motoring or find a way of stopping foxes getting onto the roads - neither of which seems very feasible at the moment! On the other hand, killing foxes deliberately is avoidable. My personal view is that it should not be done needlessly (i.e. just for sport), and that if there is a good reason to have certain foxes killed - as there may well be - that it should be done as humanely as practically possible, whether that means shooting them by marksmen (to maximize the chances of a clean kill) or - horrors! - with hounds.

the stress of being chased is no different for the rabbit being chased by the fox or the fox being chased by hounds, both rabbit and fox are prey animals

Except that one occurs without our intervention, while the other takes a conscious decision on our part. Does that matter? We could deliberately engineer all kinds of meetings between animals that resulted in stress, and although the chasing and killing that occurred could arguably be described as 'natural', it wouldn't automatically make it okay to do so.

 

[Keimanp]

As a 'sport' its emergence was simply entertainment for royalty and wealthy landowners. Everything else is secondary.

I disagree, As a sport its emergence was through royalty and wealthy landowners wanting to control foxes and protect their livestock. In times past chicken wire, pens and huts didn't exist in the forms they do today. Entertainment from the sport came secondary.

Do we really live in a society where it is acceptable to disagree with something and use class as an arguement?

 

[AmyMay]

Do we really live in a society where it is acceptable to disagree with something and use class as an argument?

Oh, it's not my intention to use class as an argument at all, just wanted to correct Serenity's post.

 

[Wheels]

It is still legal here in every part of the island of ireland. Personally i don't partake as i think shooting with a rifle is a better way of dealing with over populated areas.

There are a few owners of high powered rifles in my area who shoot foxes on behalf of farmers which seems to work well

 

[Keimanp]

... its the method by which this supposed control of fox population is delivered...... Its the tradition that people dont want to let go of, and I can understand that but things change - we no longer send small children up chimneys either but I dont see anyone harping on about that (jk btw for anyone who is getting their knickers in a twist)

Alot of how the control of the fox population is delivered is now sensationalised media spin and not accurate. This is unfortunate and does not enable effective informative and accurate debate.

I think a lot of it is tradition that people don't want to let go of and that is not a bad thing. I also think that the fox numbers caught are 'man'ed up' to make them look a lot better than they are.

But as for small children up chimneys I could do with a couple cleaning if you know of any available? chimneys, not children that is!

 

[Keimanp]

Oh, it's not my intention to use class as an argument at all, just wanted to correct Serenity's post.

Sorry, I didn't mean to suggest you were, I have been reading quickly and saw it and it triggered a thought and I saw it another way which is easily done with this topic as it does use class as an arguement on occassion which I disagree with. I was more meaning it as an open question as class has been touched on a couple of times through the thread..

 

[fburton]

Serenity087 - First let me say that I agree with a lot of what you wrote - e.g. that fox hunting can't be compared directly with baiting and fighting, that the effectiveness of hunting with hounds versus shooting is not as clear cut as some may believe. I also share your distaste of violent action and of the political process that brought about the ban.

However, I'm not sure about this part...

Foxes would self regulate if not for their hugely varied diet, and their smartness again. With an endless supply of rubbish, discarded fast food, small rodents and berries and worms (yes, they'll eat those too!) - there is none of the natural ups and downs to control foxes like there would normally be! Also, whatever you think, foxes are NOT the top of the food chain!! Bears and wolves, ex natives of the UK, would have killed them, and still do in the states and other countries where the three co-exist!! Ergo SOMEONE has to control them!

In the countryside, foxes are largely self-regulating because space for territories hardly changes and food supply remains as limited/abundant as it always was (assuming domestic animals stay effectively protected). If they weren't killed, their numbers wouldn't keep rising - there would be nothing like the population explosion that some people say would happen. The UK fox population would stay pretty much as it is now overall, with some local variations in numbers. Even if road deaths, which contribute far more to mortality than hunting, were eliminated the numbers still wouldn't increase by very much. So it really isn't true to say that their numbers need to be controlled overall - although there may be arguments for local control, especially if particular individuals are causing a problem. This may be the case in cities, where numbers have increased in recent years where I live (in Glasgow). Whether or not urban fox numbers warrant culling measures is not something I have a particular view on.

Edited to add: when I say "always was", I mean in the last century or so, not prehistoric timescales - because man has certainly shaped the landscape and that has had an effect on habitats.

 

[Oberon]

I read this as a child in a horsey magazine and still remember it by heart;

"Mama," said the cub to the vixen,
"pray what is the meaning of life?
Why do we live in this hole in the ground,
afraid to go out in daylight?"

"My son," said the vixen (most proudly)
"One thing I have always been taught.
We were put on this Earth with the purpose
of providing the Huntsman with sport."

"Some humans will die from consumption.
And others (more lucky) from gin.
But for you we will make the assumption,
that you'll end up torn limb from limb."

"But remember, my son, at your life's end
is something of which you'll be proud.
For your death will provide entertainment
for some of the Great Hunting Crowd."

 

[Goldenstar]

The majority of this post is pointless as fox hunting has been banned for some time.

 

[SplashofSoy]

Aaaaaarrrrggghhh.. where to start???

Bear baiting, badger baiting, dog fighting and cock fighting are non comparable to fox hunting. Not ONE of those even pretends it has a purpose other than human entertainment. Fox hunting is training for P2P horses, experience for the pony club, a learning curve for wannabe eventers, a social event for rural communities (and they need them!), a reason for farmers to maintain hedges and fences to a jumpable standard.... It's so much more than just killing for fun!

The kill itself - it's only ever one hound killing one fox. The tearing apart bit is post mortem and even if the fox were to still be alive, it'd be so immencely quick. A bullet lodged in your guts isn't that quick really. There's no such thing as accurate shooting unless you're shooting targets. Even deer stalkers often have to follow deer as they bleed out and die slowly!

Foxes don't kill for fun. They're amazingly smart creatures who have the potential to plan ahead. If you were out shopping and saw branded tinned beans for 10p a can, would you not stock up for all those winter nights when beans on toast is bliss? If left undisturbed, a fox will bury every single one of those chickens it massacred the night before for the months ahead!

Foxes would self regulate if not for their hugely varied diet, and their smartness again. With an endless supply of rubbish, discarded fast food, small rodents and berries and worms (yes, they'll eat those too!) - there is none of the natural ups and downs to control foxes like there would normally be! Also, whatever you think, foxes are NOT the top of the food chain!! Bears and wolves, ex natives of the UK, would have killed them, and still do in the states and other countries where the three co-exist!! Ergo SOMEONE has to control them!

Dogs vs foxes is not unnatural and cannot be trained (my old gundog took on a fox and between him and the others they tore it to pieces. Irrelevant that someone had just shot it, they went savage on it. This included spaniels, labs and pointers!!!). I know of a foxhound who was moved to another pack because he wouldn't stop hunting foxes! (naughty boy, not reading the law!). They don't need to be "abused" into going hunting!

I'm nowadays not really pro or anti. I love my foxes and there are certain individuals I hope escape the hunt. But what I cannot stand is people getting violent and aggressive about the whole thing (yes, I'm looking at you, hunt sabs) or people spouting obvious rubbish, from both sides, because they're miseducated by the media.
What I hate the most is that some dumb butthole decided to make a law about it when it's glaringly obvious no one either cares, or knows what is involved!

Agreed!

If speak to people who are knowledgable about hunting (often small farmers hunts where followers are knowledgable and see the huntsman working rather than part of a huge pack busy jumping to notice whats actually happening) the respect for their quarry (pre ban) and knowledge of its habits and life are huge, far more than alot of people on here. The incorrect facts and lack of knowledge always astounds me for people who profess thier beliefs so strongly on both sides of the debate.

I happen to be pro hunting but then i am not a vegetarian, would be in faovur of a badger cull and am quite happy if my terrier catches a bunny rabbit whilst out on a walk! Buts thats a whole different debate. I would rather see a controlled strong healthy fox population rather than the large numbers mangy poor specimins so often seen today.

 

[rhino]

The majority of this post is pointless as fox hunting has been banned for some time.

Why? It happened in the fairly recent past, and may be brought back in the future. It still happens in other countries (Remember HHO is not just for British posters). If it were pointless why would it have had so many replies... Or shouldn't we be allowed to talk about anything that isn't happening right at the present moment?

You may not find it interesting (although obviously interesting enough to post on it) but please don't presume for anyone else

 

[Morgan123]

Yes some effect, I am not saying that the fox will be uneffected by being chased or serverly effected, but I nor anyone else on this forum can catagorically say what effect it has on the fox and to what degree. It is likely that in most instances that the effect on the fox will not be as traumatic as people and the media make out thanks to the effect of adrenaline. Should the fox evade a pack of hounds, which they do quite frequently then they are very likely to see no ill effects from the chase, thanks to the natural evolved ability of being a prey animal.

It is a better form of control in terms that the chase of the fox utilises the natural instincts of the fox, 'to flee'. In reality 'The chase' does not last all that long and when the first hound reaches the fox death is fairly quick. So from the initial chase to the kill you are looking at 15 minutes. (The whole duration of the hunt is probably 6 hours. A fox is not kept in a box and released just before the hounds and the whole 6 hours are spent chasing it. The majority of the time is spent on the hunt for the quarry)

Alternatives being Poison or gun. No poison you put down will kill a fox in less than an hour, death is longer, slower and more drawn out probably closer to the 24-48 hour mark. I would imagine poisoning has the same effect as being ill slowly deteriorating.

Most farmers who are the most likely person to shoot a fox are not trained marksmen, they use shot guns, and if you watch on a shoot you typically get a wall of 10 people with shot guns aiming at 1 bird. Everyone doesn't hit the bird and on occasion it gets away. The chances are that the fox will get maimed and will slope off into the undergrowth or its den and either slowly bleed to death or deteriorate due to healing but then not being able to hunt due to injuries sustained. Could be instant, likely to be longer, 15 mins to up to a week or so.

The best and cleanest method would be to employ trained marksmen but this is neither practical or affordable. So out of the realistic options it is a better option.

I think you'll find that fear, panic and terror are all part of the fleeing response - including adrenaline - which we see in all animals who are under direct pressure and about to be eaten...So we feel fear, panic, and terror - but anyone who's around animals can clearly see that they feel it too (take horses, for exmaple, on seeing aplastic bag in the wind ). Technically that's anthropomorphisising (sp!!!) but you can't possibly argue that a fox does not feel terrified when it's being chased by a pack of hounds?! Surely??

Secondly - you mention practicality and affordability. When you think about it, it's not very practical either to kill one fox with an entire pack of hounds, a team of people, and a whole following of others on horseback. The only reason that's affordable at all is because people will pay to do it. So I don't think practicality of training people to shoot really comes into it, if we're looking at this overall?

 

[Morgan123]

Why? It happened in the fairly recent past, and may be brought back in the future. It still happens in other countries (Remember HHO is not just for British posters). If it were pointless why would it have had so many replies... Or shouldn't we be allowed to talk about anything that isn't happening right at the present moment?

You may not find it interesting (although obviously interesting enough to post on it) but please don't presume for anyone else

Hunting still goes on - we talked about this a few pages ago. Lots of people still hunt illegally (and it's still an interesting debate, of course, even if they didn't !)

 

[wildflower]

We are surrounded by farms, live on a farm ourselves and most of my friends are working farmers.Working amongst animals and livestock pests such as foxes are shown short shrift.Same as rats in the feed bins and rabbits in the fields.Livestock needs protection and pest control is a necessary , we,ve been plagued this year by recurrent fox attacks as have all our immeadiate neighbours.Shooting is an ideal choice and I would,nt have any qualms if hunting was brought back .Has no one who has posted so far any experience of a fox attack on their livestock or chickens??..we have lost chickens and ducks during the day as they free range .

 

[Saucisson]

Hmmmmmmm, I straddle the fence.

I was raised in fox-hunting country by “city” parents from very poor backgrounds who had come through the post-war education system and “done good”.

As so often happens, daughter of “done good” parents who moved out of the city, I wanted to ride horses and after much nagging, finally succeeded. At this time my late beloved Father was taking me to see Michael Foot speaking and I was reading “The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists”.

I was given the offer to hunt aged 15 on a super arab eventer I was riding. I was in a quandary, my parents despised the “toff” attitude of hunts and meets were on a Tuesday (hello! School day!). I didn’t go.

I never felt comfortable with killing something and was also never comfortable with my non-horsey background. A “riding school kid”. A hunting lass at school (few years older) always said they never caught anything anyway and just enjoyed the jolly.

Fast forward a few years and after uni I got a (temp) job at a very well-known hunt as a stable girl (Dad had died, Mum not happy with my choice but went along with it).

I was absolutely ostracised by the other horse folk (NOT the houndsmen though who were a right ole laugh) because I’d been to uni and was a “riding school kid”. This experience turned me very anti-hunting for a fair few years. The attitude to the horses “well we loose a few every year through broken legs because the people who can pay can’t ride” (ie Mr Bread Millionaire) and the general pre-war attitude (the master would ignore me but greet his horse as I groomed him).

Now, the “riding school kid” is still going strong. I finally bought my own horse 2 years ago. I worked away and worked some time in the Middle East to be able to pay for him. He’s, a cracking little horse who I’d love to hunt as it would be great for his confidence. I had the offer again 2 years ago here in Belgium (drag hunt) but he was to young and silly to take it up.

Now? I’m still stuck on that fence. I’d have more respect and support for the hunting community if like the girl at school, they admitted they just love the jolly and they hardly ever catch anything anyway……………..

 

[Bernster]

"I’d have more respect and support for the hunting community if they admitted they just love the jolly and they hardly ever catch anything anyway…………….. "

Hmmm, yup, that'd be me

 

[Keimanp]

I think you'll find that fear, panic and terror are all part of the fleeing response - including adrenaline - which we see in all animals who are under direct pressure and about to be eaten...So we feel fear, panic, and terror - but anyone who's around animals can clearly see that they feel it too (take horses, for exmaple, on seeing aplastic bag in the wind ). Technically that's anthropomorphisising (sp!!!) but you can't possibly argue that a fox does not feel terrified when it's being chased by a pack of hounds?! Surely??

I haven't said that the fox does not feel fear when it is being chased. The degree to which the fox feels this fear is however questionable. The production of adrenaline and its natural responses kick in to aid in it getting out of the situation. It does not matter whether or not it is 1 pair of hounds or 100 hundred the same flight response will be instigated. It could be a group of hikers who set the fox off, or a metal bin lid falling from when it is raiding a bin. On a regular basis it is probable that it feels fear and reacts accordingly. The length of the actual chase is not as long as is made out. The most amount of time is spent picking up the trail.

Secondly - you mention practicality and affordability. When you think about it, it's not very practical either to kill one fox with an entire pack of hounds, a team of people, and a whole following of others on horseback. The only reason that's affordable at all is because people will pay to do it. So I don't think practicality of training people to shoot really comes into it, if we're looking at this overall?

Hunting with hounds may not be that practical, but it is very affordable as those in attendance fund the event. Shooting a fox is not that practical especially when you consider all the legislation around owning and using a firearm along with the probability of a kill shot. but then who pays to train people to shoot? Who foots that bill? Who funds the shot cost? Is it as affordable?

So out of the two options when considering cost and practicality, neither are that practical and one is self funding the other costly.

 

[marmalade76]

"I’d have more respect and support for the hunting community if they admitted they just love the jolly and they hardly ever catch anything anyway…………….. "

Hmmm, yup, that'd be me

And me.

But some would say that the correct answer is 'to watch hounds work' as just going out for a jolly is frowned upon by the serious hunter.

 

[Quantock-cob]

Don't agree with foxhunting, which happens twice a week in my area - so def not banned here! Really don't think they care about the supposed ban.

We also have stag hunting here - which is really disgusting. And if you think fox hunters are reckless with their horses...I have seen some dreadful riding from the stag hounds. I would NEVER put my horse though that

 

[Shantara]

ahhh so it's ok for a fox to chase a rabbit and a car to knock over a fox and leave it in agony by the side of the road to endure a slow and painful death but you don't like the thought of hounds chasing a fox and it being killed quickly by the huntsman don't think you've really thought that through
the stress of being chased is no different for the rabbit being chased by the fox or the fox being chased by hounds, both rabbit and fox are prey animals
And as for 'leaving foxes in the country' do you honestly think we have any control over where foxy decides to live, he's a smart animal and will go where food is plentiful, be that food natural prey or waste produced by humans

Foxes aren't pray animals, hounds chase them because they have the scent, you could train them to hunt anything and they would. The stress would be no different, but the need to cause that stress is entirely different. We won't die if we don't chase a fox, but a fox WILL die if it doesn't chase a rabbit, or whatever else it finds. Foxes NEED to hunt to live, if they aren't smart enough to move to a town and raid bins.
I don't like road kill, it always gives me a sick feeling, but there's nothing that can be done about that, unless everyone's going to give up driving...yea, I can see that happening! It does control a large amount of the fox population though. I often see dead ones and very very very rarely see live foxes.
I think you've got my point entirely wrong. I said leave the ones in the country...as in, don't kill them, not tell them where to go!

 

[JFTDWS]

Well, I am an expert in how foxes feel and think, having read Fantastic Mister Fox many times as a child. As I recall, being chased by Mr Farmer and his shotgun was a jolly good wheeze and Mr F. Fox was always having a jolly good time outwitting him and so on. If Mr Farmer didn't try to have his revenge on Mr F Fox, it would be a very boring life for both Messrs Fox and Farmer and a very boring story

I'm looking forward to taking Fergs hunting. Provided he doesn't kill me

 

[Abz88]

Ermm, I don't know if anyone has read the news lately, but hunting foxes with hounds is illegal and has been since 2005.

Badger baiting is also illegal, still goes on, and there is NO public outcry about it. While we are at it, what about dog fighting or cock fighting, both illegal...but strangely there is silence on the subject from LACS and the other anti groups.

So, before we all start pounding on about 40 hounds against 1 fox, lets try to get our facts straight shall we?

I agree, all these are illegal, but it does not make illegal fox hunting any less criminal or barbaric than any of the others listed.

I do not understand the mentality of those who hunt with dogs on horse back, never have, probably never will. Shoot to kill a fox, fine, its quick and if it has to be done, thats the way. Rather than chasing it for miles until it collapses out of exhastion then gets ripped apart alive by some dogs while the riders watch on and see it as a successful hunt,...seems a very old fashioned and stuck in a backwards view way of thinking. I am amazed these people don't have salves in cages in their back gardens along with the dogs. But, away from the killing of the fox itself, lets look at other things, like how many pet cats are ripped apart by dogs by mistake during hunts? A huge amount, so any cats fans, sorry,....but it might be eaten! The hunt dogs are distroyed once they get to a slow age, usualy the age of about 6 years old (a prime age of a pet dog) because they cant keep up with the pack as well as the 2 year olds. Destroying not only fox's and cats, but their own healthy and relitavly young dogs because they have little use (throw away culture). Also, horses working hard on the roads,...I dread to think of their poor legs and the minor fractures they will all probably have. So, it is a selfish and sick sport, and illegal. More should be done to stop this vile 'sport' carrying on.